Apple is reportedly gearing up to begin production on its long-rumored but highly anticipated connected HDTV - affectionately dubbed "iTV" by those who continue to report on the allegedly forthcoming new Apple product.

According to a new revelation from Jefferies analyst Peter Misek, Apple's television set could likely go into production as soon as February at a Sharp plant in Japan. If so, the TV could be ready for mass market introduction by June 2012.

Our checks indicate Sharp will provide panels for iPads, iPhones, and iTVs. We believe Apple has purchased $500M to $1B in equipment, Sharp and Apple have modified the IGZO (indium, gallium, zinc) technology to make much-improved displays, and Sharp and Apple may jointly produce OLED panels with a new production technology that has led to significant yield improvements.

"They hope to avoid the fate of other industries and manufacturers who were caught flat footed by Apple," Misek observed in a note to investors this week. "Having said that, it appears that mainstream TV manufacturers are likely to be at least 6 to 12 months behind in a best-case scenario."

According to Misek, the Sharp relationship will allow Apple to branch away from Samsung and "gain additional display capacity with leading-edge technology."

"Given Apple is fronting the capital spending, we also see these panels being procured at good prices, which means better-than-expected margins," he concluded.

^^^ you don't want that because Apple won a junction already, if they call it Apple1080p they are entitled to your domain name for free :-( as a matter of fact if they even produce a 1080p television your domain is there's for the taking.....

^^^ you don't want that because Apple won a junction already, if they call it Apple1080p they are entitled to your domain name for free :-( as a matter of fact if they even produce a 1080p television your domain is there's for the taking.....

As for a potential iTV naming issue in the UK. IF this product ever comes to fruition and IF it is named iTV it wouldnt be the first time apple paid to share/obtain naming rights from an existing company. Cisco owned "i-Phone" for years, apple paid cisco to use it when the released the first iPhone.

A rumor that will never happen. Apple prices can't compete with the current tv market. Prices for tv drop quick. A newly released mid range 55" led lcd priced at $2000. 6-8 months later the price is about $1000. Apple barely drops 10-15% for an idevice that has been out for a year.

A rumor that will never happen. Apple prices can't compete with the current tv market. Prices for tv drop quick. A newly released mid range 55" led lcd priced at $2000. 6-8 months later the price is about $1000. Apple barely drops 10-15% for an idevice that has been out for a year.

I think with Apple prices on them it would take it out of the market for most people. It would need to offer plenty more than the internet ready tvs that are out there right now.

i dont think it would be as straight forward as paying for the name as the UK iTV for one are a stubborn company and with apples record they would prob want them to stop using the name which will never happen, the iphone name wasnt cisco's brand it would be like apple making a food product and calling it coca cola, i see some trouble a-brewing in the UK

If the prices aren't competitive, apple or not, I can't see a huge amount would buy them if there's a tv that does the same thing for £700 instead of £1200, this is a tv, totally different from pcs and phones, and if they are using mostly Internet subscription services for channels etc, most people in uk have sky or virgin, are they really gonna pay for more tv services for tv they likely already have?In fact the more i think the more I can't really see why I would buy one, I already have a 50" 1080p tv, sky HD, PS3, a laptop and an iPhone, what would this tv add to my life that I would need so bad that I would justify buying another new expensive tv?

They won't/can't call it iTV. They will have to settle with AppleTV or TV.The current company holding the name ITV is a much bigger, much older and much more well known brand than Cisco's iOS and iPhone was.

If the prices aren't competitive, apple or not, I can't see a huge amount would buy them if there's a tv that does the same thing for £700 instead of £1200, this is a tv, totally different from pcs and phones, and if they are using mostly Internet subscription services for channels etc, most people in uk have sky or virgin, are they really gonna pay for more tv services for tv they likely already have?In fact the more i think the more I can't really see why I would buy one, I already have a 50" 1080p tv, sky HD, PS3, a laptop and an iPhone, what would this tv add to my life that I would need so bad that I would justify buying another new expensive tv?

Sounds logical, but we have seen logic fail many times when the word "Apple" is thrown in.